9/2 Q&A - War Game

原文網址:
http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/09/02/2-9-2013-2/

=

Today was a bit technical, so I hope I got everything right
今天的問題比較技術性，我希望我沒有弄錯問題的內容

- SerB is not afraid of WoWp stealing players from WoT, he thinks the migration
will be normal
SerB 不擔心 WoWp 會拉走 WoT 的玩家，他覺得玩家跑去玩很正常

- SerB describing the difference between US and Soviet penetration methodology:
“The difference is in the amount of shell fragments, that make it past the
armor. In the common American and German system it is based on
“primary penetration” (20 percent of fragments make it behind the armor),
while the Soviet data are based on the “guaranteed penetration” (80
percent). We compared the data of German and American 75mm guns tested in
USSR and with German 50mm, 88mm and British 57mm. There is a 1,17 times
difference on average”
SerB 描述美國和蘇聯計算穿深的方法之間的不同: "不同點是在計算擊穿裝甲的砲彈碎
片多寡；美國和德國的系統是基於 "初級擊穿" (有 20% 的碎片穿過裝甲)，而蘇聯的資
料是基於 "保證擊穿" (80%)。我們比較過在蘇聯測試過的德國和美國 75mm砲、德國的
50mm 和 88mm砲、英國的57mm砲，它們的數據在兩種方法之間平均有 1.17倍的差距"

- SerB states that this table is not accurate, he considers the Soviet gun
tests table accurate
SerB 表示這個表格並不正確，他認為蘇聯的測試表格才是正確的

- according to the (Soviet) data above, the Ferdinand 88mm gun performed
worse than the Soviet D-10T and D-52. SerB and others were wondering why that
happened, it was possible the Soviets used very early ammunition model (SS:
Flak), in the end, they decided not to nerf the Ferdinand gun based on this
根據上面的蘇聯資料，Ferdinand 88mm 砲表現得比蘇聯的 D-10T 和 D-52 差。SerB
和其他人在想為什麼會這樣，有可能蘇聯是用很早期的砲彈模型去算的(SS: 高射炮)，基
於這個原因他們最後決定不要 nerf Ferdinand 的砲

- WG actually started using the German penetration methodology, but switched
to the Soviet one during closed WoT beta
WG 一開始用的是德國計算穿深的方法，不過 WoT CB 的時候改成用蘇聯的算法

- T-62 won’t appear in WoT, SerB categorically denies the appearance of
smoothbore guns (SerB states that the current “armor plays no role” whine
would be mild in comparison, as smoothbore guns typically have 400mm+
penetration)
T-62 不會在 WoT 出現，SerB 斷然拒絕滑膛砲出現在遊戲內(SerB 表示實裝的話目前
的 "裝甲無用論" 抱怨會比較少，因為基本上滑膛砲的穿深都超過 400mm)

- SerB states that historically the E-75 had neither 120mm sides, nor a 128mm
gun, it had 80mm side armor. It was not an improvement of the King Tiger, but
its simplification for production. Currently it is not historical in game and
if a suitable candidate for its replacement is found, it will be reconsidered
(SS: that’s funny, I thought it was actually 120mm)
SerB 表示歷史上 E-75 沒有 120mm 的車側裝甲，也沒有 128mm 砲，它的側裝甲是
80mm。跟 KT 比起來沒有太大的進步，不過比較容易生產。目前遊戲內的 E-75 不符合
史實，如果有找到可能代替的車輛，會考慮用找到的那輛車(SS: 真有趣，我還以為真的
是 120mm)

- the final variant of Panther II lower frontal plate was allegedly planned
to be 120mm thick, SerB will have a look at it too (SS: probably a typo, the
poster most likely means upper frontal plate)
Panther II 首下裝甲最後聽說要改成 120mm 厚，SerB 也會去查查資料(SS: 應該是張
貼的人打字錯誤，指的應該是首上裝甲厚度)

- theoretically it would be possible to nerf the D-25T penetration to 165 by
introducing early type shells, but it won’t be done… for now
理論上有可能利用引進早期型砲彈來 nerf D-25T 的穿甲能力到 165，不過目前不會改

- SerB agrees with the King Tiger 105mm aim time nerf
SerB 贊同 nerf KT 105 砲的瞄準時間

- SerB states that the 8.8 changes in German heavy tanks mobility still made
them roughly equal in value to what they were before
SerB 表示 8.8 對德國重坦行動力的更動仍使得它們的價值和之前大略相同

- SerB sees no reason for rebalancing T-62A/Object 140 in order to make them
differ more from one another
SerB 找不到任何需要重新平衡 T-62A/Obj. 140 使得它們更不相像的理由

- it’s possible the collision model of the Object 140 will change (making it
bigger)
有可能Obj. 140 的碰撞模組會改變(改大一點)

- historically, the D-5T and S-53 guns were considered sufficient until the
King Tiger appeared. But the fact that the 85BM gun appeared shows that the
ballistic properties of 52-K were considered inferior to the German 88mm
歷史上，D-5T 和 S-53 砲在 KT 出現之前都認為是足夠的。但事實上 85BM 砲的出現
指出 52-K 的彈道性能比不上德國的 88 砲

- IS-7 will not be made more mobile
IS-7 的行動力不會改的更好

- animated tail gunner will be implemented into WoWp
WoWp 會做尾砲手的動畫

=

完

--